Bug 935751 – x11-misc/macopix has incorrect LICENSE

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: IN_PROGRESS ---

[Description ganooslashlinus 2024-07-08 14:25:20 UTC]

Created attachment 897323 [details]
scancodetookit output

LICENSE="GPL-2 free-noncomm"

README:
 The code in this distribution is Copyright 2002 by Kurumi Chimari.

   This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
   it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
   the Free Software Foundation; either version 3, or (at your option)
   any later version.

   This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
   GNU General Public License for more details.

   You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
   along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
   Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA

   In addition, as a special exception, K.Chimari gives permission to link
   this code of this program with the OpenSSL library (or with modified
   versions of OpenSSL that use the same license as OpenSSL), and distribute
   linked combinations including the two. You must obey the GNU General
   Public License in all respects for all of the code used other than OpenSSL.
   If you modify this file, you may extend this exception to your version of
   the file, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do so,
   delete this exception statement from your version.

A number of files under intl/ are licensed under the LGPLv2.1+

src/ is primarily GPLv2+

There is one file licensed under the GPLv3+ is; intl/plural.c

As OpenSSLv3 is under Apachev2.0, which is not compatible with the GPLv2, the only compatible terms the software can be distributed under is the GPLv3+.


Also, for the art/data files, "free-noncomm" (putting free and noncommercial together is incredibly oxymoronic really) isn't correct. 

From what I can tell, the author has given the below informal license for the mascots (https://rosegray.sakura.ne.jp/macopix/index-e.html);
"The program code of MaCoPiX is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any later version.

But, these mascot of MaCoPiX are not GPL2 software. So, you must get the permission of the author, when you want to redistribute these mascot packages.

Especially, redistribution of mascots for any commercial distributions or magazines' CDROMs could be denied. Because those case could be regarded as commercial uses."

This informal license only permits noncommerical distribution and nothing else.

A few of the mascot files contain a code_conv.sh script, but those scripts are so trivial and non-creative than I'm confident that they don't qualify for copyright.


Either a MaCoPiX license should be added with that text above (with maybe 2 changed to 3), or the following meta notice should be added;

nonfree-data:
For a non-software component, the author(s) have granted an informal license allowing non-commercial distribution only. Permission from the author(s) is needed to modify and/or commercially distribute the data.


Therefore should be: LICENSE="GPL-3+ nonfree-data"

[Comment 1 Ulrich Müller 2024-07-08 16:36:19 UTC]

(In reply to ganooslashlinus from comment #0)
> From what I can tell, the author has given the below informal license for
> the mascots (https://rosegray.sakura.ne.jp/macopix/index-e.html);
> "The program code of MaCoPiX is free software; you can redistribute it
> and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
> published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your
> option) any later version.
> 
> But, these mascot of MaCoPiX are not GPL2 software. So, you must get the
> permission of the author, when you want to redistribute these mascot
> packages.
> 
> Especially, redistribution of mascots for any commercial distributions or
> magazines' CDROMs could be denied. Because those case could be regarded as
> commercial uses."

Does "the author" mean the same author as the author of the software, or some third-party copyright holder? From the list of mascots I very much suspect the latter.

> This informal license only permits noncommerical distribution and nothing
> else.

I don't see what would grant the right to redistribute these mascots at all. Seems quite obvious that they cannot be redistributed without the author's explicit permission.

> [...]
> Therefore should be: LICENSE="GPL-3+ nonfree-data"

Rather LICENSE="GPL-2+ all-rights-reserved", plus RESTRICT="mirror"?

[Comment 2 Ulrich Müller 2024-07-08 16:57:38 UTC]

Looking into it further, for example macopix-mascot-comic_party-euc-ja-1.02/README.jp says (and README.jp in the other dirs seems to be similar):

---
■ 著作権等
    収録されている各マスコットは Leaf(http://www.leaf.co.jp//)
    さま製作のゲーム『こみっくパーティー』シリーズの登場キャラクター
    であり、本マスコットはこの作品の二次創作物にあたります。
    Leafさんの方針ではこうした二次創作物に対して自由な活動を認めて
    下さっていますので配布に関する問題はございません。

    なお、本アーカイブ内のすべてのファイルに関して著作権はくるみちまり
    ([e-mail])が有しますので、他所での許可がないま
    までの配布を禁止致します。

    本マスコットの使用の際に発生したいかなる物理的・精神的障害に関して
    著作者は責任を負いかねます。自己責任での使用をお願いします。
---

Which Google translates to:

---
■ Copyright, etc.

The mascots included are characters from the Comic Party game series created by Leaf (http://www.leaf.co.jp//), and these mascots are derivative works of that work.

Leaf's policy allows for free use of such derivative works, so there are no problems with distribution.

All files in this archive are copyrighted by Kurumi Chimari ([e-mail]), so distribution without permission elsewhere is prohibited.

The copyright holder cannot be held responsible for any physical or mental damage caused by the use of these mascots. Use at your own risk.
---

So we have an original copyright holder (and their website is dead) with some policy whose exact terms we do not know.

We also have bug 49568 comment #3 saying "I got an email from the author and he granted the use of mascots for Gentoo" but we do not know the exact conditions of this permission either.

[Comment 3 Larry the Git Cow 2024-07-08 17:40:11 UTC]

The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s):

https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=8aa9b1dece94610032c8e91a1cc983e804c9e360

commit 8aa9b1dece94610032c8e91a1cc983e804c9e360
Author:     Ulrich Müller <[e-mail]>
AuthorDate: 2024-07-08 17:36:08 +0000
Commit:     Ulrich Müller <[e-mail]>
CommitDate: 2024-07-08 17:40:05 +0000

    x11-misc/macopix: update HOMEPAGE, LICENSE, SRC_URI
    
    Update license of software to "GPL-3+ GPL-2+ LGPL-2.1+".
    
    Leave the license of assets alone for now, as the situation is not
    entirely clear.
    
    Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/935751
    Signed-off-by: Ulrich Müller <[e-mail]>

 x11-misc/macopix/macopix-3.4.0.ebuild | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

[Comment 4 Ulrich Müller 2024-07-08 17:41:57 UTC]

Maybe the cleanest solution would be to remove these image collections from the ebuild altogether, and add a README.gentoo that would ask the user to download them instead.